Treat others with basic decency. No personal attacks, shill accusations, hate-speech, flaming, baiting, trolling, witch-hunting, or unsubstantiated accusations. Threats of violence will result in a ban. More Info.

Do not post users' personal information.

Users who violate this rule will be banned on sight. Witch-hunting and giving out private personal details of other people can result in unexpected and potentially serious consequences for the individual targeted. More Info.

Vote based on quality, not opinion.

Political discussion requires varied opinions. Well written and interesting content can be worthwhile, even if you disagree with it. Downvote only if you think a comment/post does not contribute to the thread it is posted in or if it is off-topic in /r/politics. More Info.

Do not manipulate comments and posts via group voting.

Manipulating comments and posts via group voting is against reddit TOS. More Info.

Your headline must be comprised only of the exact copied and pasted headline of the article. More Info.

Submissions must be an original source.

An article must contain significant analysis and original content--not just a few links of text among chunks of copy and pasted material. Content is considered rehosted when a publication takes the majority of their content from another website and reposts it in order to get the traffic and collect ad revenue. More Info.

Articles must be written in English

An article must be primarily written in English for us to be able to moderate it and enforce our rules in a fair and unbiased manner. More Info.

Spam is bad!

If 33% or more of your submissions are from a single website, you will be banned as a spammer. More Info.

The ALL CAPS and 'Breaking' rule is applied even when the actual title of the article is in all caps or contains the word 'Breaking'. This rule may be applied to other single word declarative and/or sensational expressions, such as 'EXCLUSIVE:' or 'HOT:'. More Info.

CISPA, the bill in Congress that would end privacy on the internet, has gone through a tricky legislative maze that has a lot of people confused. Here's the deal: CISPA is now tucked inside of Senate bill S.2105, which has bipartisan congressional support, is being actively supported by the Obama Admin., and is scheduled for a vote in early June. It's alive and well, and on a clear path to becoming law.

The Senate goes on recess next week, which means we have exactly 3 days to make calls before they leave for a week and then come back for the vote. The most important thing we can do with that time is to try to get meetings scheduled with our senators while they are in their home states over the recess. This is a proven grassroots strategy that was key to killing SOPA. We can beat CISPA if we do this.

Reddit, we really need your help this time. We can't email our supporters about this because of an ongoing deliverability issue with our system, so we're counting on our friends and allies to spread this in other ways.

Here's the site we put together -- use it to call your senators and request a meeting ::

Good guy Sen. Wyden said yesterday that this bill would create a "cyber industrial complex [...] that profits from fear and whose currency is Americans' private data." He's right, and our best shot at stopping it from becoming law is getting this strategy spread out far and wide right now.

# #

Update

# #

First of all, thanks so much for all the support! You guys are doing an AWESOME job contacting your Congresspeople about CISPA, and more importantly, you're helping to spread the word.

We would love it if you could leave a comment in this thread detailing how your conversation went after calling or visiting your Congresspeople's office. It'll help us know who is for the bill, who is against the bill, and which tactics are making a difference.

With everyone's help, we're confident that this thing can be beaten. Let's work to keep The Internet safe for another day!

Maybe what you need is a Grover Norquist style "American's for Internet Reform" pledge. One paragraph pledge that congressional candidates can sign, or not, stating that they will neither enact, nor support, any bill pertaining to internet privacy.

Tell them who you are. ("Hi. My name is _. I'm a student/worker/employee/ect with ____, and I oppose the the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act [CISPA] which is being passed under Senate Bill S.2105, which would do to the internet what China and Vietnam have done to the internet, censor it and kill the business that goes on over it.")

Be very respectful (these guy's/lady's jobs normally sucks).

Be passionate, tell them internet neutrality and freedom are important to you, the economy, and the future.

If you do all this you'll start getting personally written letter to you in the mail from your representatives office (I have gotten 3 since I started doing this) that express support for the statements I have made, which I think (fingers crossed) have influenced the decisions of my representatives.

Tl:Dr - Writing emails does nothing, a respectful phone call about how a representative can gain or lose your vote is huge.

Just got off the phone with a staffer from Rubio's office. They haven't decided either way and are researching it. HIT THEM HARD!

"Hi, how are you? My name is [insert name here], and I am an [insert profession here]. Im calling from [city, state] in regards to senate bill 2105. Are you aware of mr/mrs [senators last name here]'s position on the bill?"

If yes and is in favor then:

I oppose the the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act [CISPA] which is being passed under Senate Bill S.2105, which would do to the internet what China and Vietnam have done to the internet, censor it and kill the business that goes on over it." Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon said yesterday that this bill would create a "cyber industrial complex [...] that profits from fear and whose currency is Americans' private data. I believe this, wholeheartedly, to be the essential truth. The idea of net neutrality and freedom effect the economy and future businesses as well as its implications in providing more data about individuals. I would like to request a meeting with the Senator for my group to speak to him. What is the best way to go about meeting with the Senator or your staff? Is there a Memorial Day event that the Senator will be attending?

If unsure of position then:

Great! I oppose the the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act [CISPA] being passed under Senate Bill S.2105, which would do to the internet what China and Vietnam have done to the internet, censor it and kill the business that goes on over it." Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon said yesterday that this bill would create a "cyber industrial complex [...] that profits from fear and whose currency is Americans' private data. I believe this wholeheartedly to be the essential truth. The idea of net neutrality and freedom effect the economy and future businesses as well as its implications in providing more data about individuals. By voting in favor of such legislation you will have lost mine and my family's votes as well. There are only two days left this week before the weekend and a week long break for memorial day in the Senate. I strongly urge your staff to research as priority with regard to this bill. It is too important of an issue to every american to be obfuscated and dovetailed into a piece of bipartisan legislation. Please be sure to include my thoughts and make a note for Mr/Mrs [senator name here] that I called.

If is aware and is against:

Great! Proof that democracy in America isn't all but finished. I would like to personally thank Mr/Mrs [senator name] for voting in favor of this bill. To me, this means mr\mrs [senator] and his\her staff understands better than most senators the importance of neutral legislation regarding privacy and the Internet. Please be sure to make a note for mr\mrs [senator name] and include my thoughts regarding this bill. Mr/Mrs [senator] has gained my and my [group or family]'s vote and support indefinitely.

I would probably not refer to the Senators as Mr/Mrs. From my limited experience, not referring to them as Senator Soandso tends to cause offense. You may not have meant it that way, but politicians are pretty narcissistic, and it might put them off.

Also "I worked hard" fuck her. She doesn't know what work is. She may be bought and sold but working is something she knows nothing about. Also the fact that she thinks she's his superior is fucking insane. She's just a Senator and in reality quite beneath him in the chain of actual command.

I'm only nitpicking because it's important to sound as professional and (for lack of a better term) not-crazy as possible. Don't get me wrong, most of your template is perfect for the occasion (though as other commenters have noted, Senator ___ is the gender-neutral and less potentially offensive honorific), but one sentence bugged me:

The idea of net neutrality and freedom effect the economy and future businesses as well as its implications in providing more data about individuals.

I get what you're trying to say. But here, it's been phrased sloppily and grammatically inadequate. I'm also not entirely sure that starting it with "net neutrality" is the wisest move, seeing as how a less informed representative/office might not understand the relevance. How about this instead?

A free internet is vital to growing and maintaining a healthy economy and strong market future businesses. In addition, the loss of this freedom has severe implications for the protection of sensitive data about ordinary, law-abiding citizens--even children.

Those last two words are a bit sensationalist, I know...but "what about the childrenz??1?!" seems to be as effective a persuader as any other.

Exactly. While we awkward geeks love email and hyperventilate while calling, most of the time emails just go to the trash bin without anyone even looking into it. CALL THEM! It really helps your point getting heard.

Yeah you are pretty much right. To be honest the reason to know the pro/con numbers is so you know how to position yourself publicly when defending your record and when campaigning. It gives all kinds of info on what to focus on.

This is exactly right. Once a congressman gets enough responses on an issue, they will have a Legislative Aide or Intern write a form letter clarifying their position. At the office I worked at it didn't matter whether we received a fax, email, written letter, or phone call it all counted the same.

Both senators and the rep in my district in TX have voicemail boxes. The last time I called to voice my opinion, my only recourse was to leave a fucking voicemail. So I did where I could, but Senator Cornyn's voicemail box was full. Is there any bigger "fuck you" to the general public?

"Hi, this is Senator Cornyn and your call is very important to me. Please leave your comments after the tone. Unless my staff is too lazy to even listen to the messages."

If this happens, find the office that is closest to you, and pay them a visit on foot. You might think that this would be a multiple hour commitment, but for the most part, it will only take 10ish minutes. Walk in, tell them who you are, why you're there, and what you want them to do about it. A staffer will probably write all this down, and your visit will be noted to a senior staffer.

Also, you can kill two-birds with one stone by saying, "Oh, by the way, YOU SHOULD PROBABLY CLEAR OUT YOUR PHONE MESSAGE INBOX"

It's also important to note that the lines for the DC office and their local offices are different, if you don't want to make a trek out to make an in-person appearance. Unless you go in business casual attire, your appearance may work against you in having their staffers take you seriously. I say phone calls are the best course of action unless you dress respectfully.

Believe me, in person visits are taken the most seriously. I work for a California senator, and we get hundreds of emails and calls per day. However, we are lucky to get even one walk-in visit or fax.

If you do decide to call, it is best if you can provide your name, email, address, and phone number, so we can enter you in our database with your position. If you are emailing, there is really NO need to rattle on and on about a bill. Emails should look like this:

Hello Senator ____,

I oppose SB 1464, because it ______ (one to two sentences).

Name:

Address:

Email:

Phone #:

Thank you, and I hope that you consider my opinion on this important bill.

-Signature-

This format saves so much time for everyone involved, and makes the same amount of change that pages and pages of emails would do.

Slightly random rant here, sorry. This is more of a FYI for all redditors.

A note on dress, if you are planning on paying your rep a visit in person:

Do you own a suit? Then wear it. Seriously. Suit, tie, hell, a briefcase if you've got one. You want to look as professional as possible, and more importantly, you want to look like you've got money - you want to look like you're on their team.

It really is a big F you when that happens (I'm in Arizona, and Senator McCain's mailbox is perpetually full and he never responds to emails). I would suggest trying your Congressional Representative, they tend to be much better about constituent service.

I'm in the same boat as you. I remember calling representatives when the SOPA/PIPA fiasco was going on, and I got three full answering machines in a row. I'm not sure if they are understaffed or just don't give a shit, but it is completely unacceptable.

It feels like a little of column A and a little of column B when it comes to such piss poor constituent service. I would suggest faxing the offices (it's harder to ignore faxes than it is to ignore emails), or taking an afternoon trip to their offices and explaining your disapproval of S.2105 as well as how upset you are at their poor constituent service which reflects poorly on them as your representatives. Even though I've called and faxed, I'm still going down to their local offices tomorrow and lodging a complaint in person because that's how fearful I am of the internet being taking away.

YOU CAN SEND FAXES ONLINE. Sorry for the caps but I was blown away when I found this out, and have used it multiple times since. It's very convenient, the only catch (as far as I know, apart from trusting them with the document) is that on the receiving end there is an advertisement on the cover page. Multiple services exist but the one I've used: http://faxzero.com/

As someone who used to work in a (Washington DC) Congressional Office, faxes are looked at less often than voicemails are.

As for getting full answering machines, I can say that it is (usually) a combination of a) being understaffed and b) "when it rains, it pours." There aren't dedicated 'constituent services' people in a Washington DC Congressional Office, besides maybe a Legislative Correspondent. All of that is handled in the District. In my office, there were four Assistants and four interns, who together were tasked with almost everything. They researched pending and future legislation, they wrote bills, they wrote statements and speeches for the Congressman, met with other officials, business leaders, and interest groups, and attended briefings and strategy hearings. Then, on top of that, they had to meet with constituents, give tours, respond to letters/e-mails, and talk to constituents who called/managed voicemails.

It was never that Constituent Opinions weren't important; rather, it was that, when you have all those things to keep track of, usually going through the voicemails was the least important thing we could be doing. Plus, during SOPA/PIPA time, we saw an influx in e-mails and calls not seen since the Healthcare debate. It was really, really hard to keep it all together, on top of our normal duties.

When I emailed Dianne Feinstien about fusion energy research, she actually sent a real response. It might have helped that it wasn't just another form letter that I sent. It was was 6 paragraphs long but had sufficient detail to convey the logic behind the reasoning of why she should support my position. It may have helped that I actually used the constituent services portion of her section on the senate.gov website for emailing. Also my email was a .edu . A persons mileage may vary among whom their elected officials at any level are. If they make themselves unavailable to the people they are supposed to represent, that's when you know to vote them out as they have lost touch.

I too have gotten detailed 5+ paragraph responses from my representatives, and it's done more to guarantee my vote for them in the future than anything else they've done. (the ones that opposed CISPA at least)

I know it seems that way, but there's very little they can do about it. They have probably 5-6 staff who have other duties and 2-4 interns trying to handle a call volume that can reach 5-20 calls per minute. Not to mention dealing with long-winded people who try to take an hour of your time, crackpots that call 5 times a day with the latest conspiracy theories they saw on tv/internet/radio, and opposition party people who just want to cuss you out over some bill or another. Sadly, only a fraction of the callers are actually within the rep/sen's constituency.

If you couldn't tell I spent a semester as one such intern and it can be pretty hard to clear a voicemail box when you only have about 5 seconds in between phone calls.

If you are calling the DC offices outside of normal business hours, their voicemail boxes fill up really fast. The boxes are provisioned and maintained by the House and Senate, and there isn't a way to make them any bigger.

It isn't unusual for the box to fill up every night for some Reps. and Senators. Also, it is right around the time that the Spring interns are gone and the Summer interns are about to start, so there might be a few weeks there were the offices seem very unresponsive over the phone. It's logistics, and 2-3 staffers can't take calls from thousands of people a day.

If you work in an office with a fax machine, fax your reps. Write your letter to them, print it out, fax it over. I receive responses when I do this. It still isn't as effective as a call (better yet, do both!), but it will get to their office and be seen.

Those are good people to be passionate about the cause with because they'll relay that passion upwards to their superiors. I'm under the impression that politicians still don't understand how passionate of an issue this is very many Americans, and the more they figure it out, the more they'll have to distance themselves from internet censoring legislation.

As someone who had the unfortunate fate of interning in a Congressman's office, please be kind to the interns who answer the phones. They get yelled at enough by everyone in the offices, and don't deserve to be berated for something they probably oppose just as much as we do.

That said, phone calls, not emails. Emails carry much less weight.

EDIT: By unfortunate, I mean that I would never want to work there permanently. Was a great career boost of an internship. Not very much fun at all though.

Yes! This is an opportunity to have a conversation. Take the opportunity to educate the intern, and even ask them their opinion. Even if they give you the noncommittal line, you have participated in the shaping of a potential influential political operative.

Actually, please do not ask us our opinion. We cannot give our opinion either way, so you really do put us in a difficult position. If we give an opinion at all, it will be a 'Oh, I absolutely agree with you!'.

I intern for a California senator, and we respond to every single one of our constituents. If we agree with their position, we will write something like, "I absolutely agree with you! We need to be doing blah!"

If my senator opposes your opinion, or has already voted against your opinion, we say, "I will absolutely keep your opinion in mind should this bill/a similar bill come before me in the future."

So don't ask us our opinion, it really only puts us in an awkward position, and it won't change our stance at all. I would take the opportunity to educate the intern though, always valuable!

EDIT: I know this is old, but I just wanted to mention that we respond as if we are the senator, if that makes sense. So that's why, when we email back, we could say something like what I have posted above. All interns and staff members have access to his email account, so any reply you get there is truthfully, from an intern.

If in the US - call, email and go into talk to your representatives or their office.

Outside the US:
You could complain at the US embassy perhaps via phone or in person. Call your own representatives and state your opposition to other similar bills and state that you are worried about how the US's bill will effect you.

Agreed. I can't send this to friends and expect them to take the time to call and email their senators because a website with the word 'awesome' is in the title and there's a single paragraph warning against police states.

call or write the closest American Embassy. Tell them that you feel you will be affected by this issue. If you call, ask for a time to meet. The Embassy's often report on how major pieces of legislation are doing abroad.

Start sandbagging. Call your own politicians and express concern. The us has physical control over much of the net's infrastructure, tell your leaders that this concerns them every bit as much as it concerns the US. Sadly, American politicians listen more closely to politicians abroad than their domestic constituency.

Actually is about intelligence, as the name implies, but that doesn't change what you wrote.

When they say security they mean national security, like what Patriot Act is doing. And like the Patriot Act can be accused and it well be. They even make it vague on purpose.

The bill is very likely response to cables leaked by Wikileaks. So if something like this would happen again like Bradley was using IM, aol msn or Google would disclose chat logs without any warrant. I think that lulz sec and even today's Al Queda message about starting cyber terrorism are fabricated to push the bill.

Why would Al Queda warn about such attack? Why didn't they send message to threaten using airplanes before 9/11?

Just got this reply:
Thank you for contacting me to express your thoughts on privacy and the security of the Internet. It's good to hear from you.

I am on your side in the fight to protect our privacy on the Internet. I understand your concerns regarding government regulation of the Internet and civil liberties. While we must thwart cyber criminals, spies and hackers from using the Internet, we must not chip away at our constitutional right to privacy.

Cyber security is an issue that affects all Americans. We are all increasingly reliant on the Internet for information, banking, and other uses. Knowing of your concerns will be helpful to me as the Senate continues to work on this issue.

Again, thanks for writing. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of any assistance to you in the future.

Al Franken is against this bill. While we didn't like his support of PIPA (which being from the entertainment industry, wasn't surprisnig), he still cares about internet privacy and net neutrality. In fact, I talked to him during the height of the SOPA/PIPA controversy and he was only in favor of PIPA if there was no website blocking provision.

SOPA/PIPA and CISPA, while internet bills, are totally different in comparison.

We need to stop alienating the senators who fight for us just because they disagree with us on one or two crucial issues. We need to support good senators, keep contacting them, and letting them know what we stand for. There are senators who vote for what is right most of the time and those who vote for the opposite. No one will ever agree with your/my opinion 100%. That doesn't mean they are hacks.

Please, any recommendation to replace Feinstein? I will vote against her anyway, but choosing one person that others will likely to vote for would increase chances of her being replaced.

BTW, she voted for NDAA would vote for SOPA, at least her response implied that. She is co sponsor of cyber security act.

Edit: There's David Alex Levitt which is CS major, so I guess I feel a bit more connected and he runs with messages against her, but I don't know what to think. Wish there were less candidates, so chances of someone else winning would be higher. I don't even care anymore if it is a Rep or Dem, as long as it is someone else to show that we can replace them.

You know what people can do? Read about networking and the history of the internet.

Yeah. Actually research the system before acting smarmy and dropping Ted Stevens quotes as it may help bring a consensus on these subjects. Going Kony for a day or so was about the worst thing that could have happened in our fight for liberty rather than censorship. If we could understand how networks function, establish community VPN's and link without government interloping using some sort of Tor, then we are unstoppable.

And we're close. Let them sign Cispa, Sopa, the Kiddy Porn initiative from our neighbors to the north and let us work to remove their paper tigers through technical discussions and practical results. By doing that, the emperor has no clothes and we've effectively destroyed what power the government has decided to strut. Don't kill the tiger, remove his teeth. It's a fate worse than death.

I get it. We want some publicity to the issues at hand but don't want to ask people to spend their efforts brushing up on techie issues as that would lose interest. I just don't see what we're accomplishing when we send messages to a representative just as clueless as we are. Hard facts and international communications topology sound pretty dense to the average internet user just as tie rods and solenoids sound greek to non-mechanics and yet we drive cars till the wheels go bald.

Still, it doesn't hurt in attempting to own a narrative through condensed and easy to swallow information about how things work. I've seen pretty excellent timelines and factsheets floating around about everything from soda consumption to the relative scope of the Mariana Trench. Something nice and simple would propagate well and give the casual reader a valid resource to use as he or she sees fit. If you want to be a bit more insidious, I would suggest throwing something in about the Utah Data Center or Operation Shamrock and demand a valid reason as to why we continue to allow such reckless activities to occur without oversite.

But going back to my point, the government can attempt any legislation they please but information will still demand freedom and those with knowhow can help in removing the power they falsely claim to own. More importantly, their little bills and ordinances are a perfect opportunity to create open source options that bypass and shed all power from this increasingly difficult republic.

This bill uses "Critical Infrastructure" as the definitive basis for its administration, whilst throwing private sector innovation in design and development of technology for the global market for commercial information technology products, including hardware and software and related products and services under the same umbrella.

You can't pretend to be protecting people from terrorism by throwing them in jail for stealing music. It doesn't work like that, stupid senator.

This may sound shocking, but can't we just leave the internet how it is in legal terms for the most part? If you're selling an online product, such as a movie or program, the job of protecting it from pirates belongs to you, not the government. It's the equivalent of leaving gold bars in the wide open and complaining when they get stolen. You should damn well know human nature and attempt to prevent your product from being stolen. The same goes for private data, if you can't keep up your security you shouldn't be in business.

The internet is one of the last 'good things' America has going for it. If we mess it up, we're screwed.

Senator Jon Kyl finally wrote me back regarding CISPA. Though he doesn't agree with me that the bill is a government "takeover" of the Internet he does not support it in any way. Pretty legit. I highly doubt McCain however will be sending a response letter my way.

Easier said than done. It would take a massive coordinated effort to mobilize the nation to change/overthrow the government. Which likely wouldn't work because government agencies that monitor comms and mass media that misportrays everything.

Scott Brown was actually very receptive to criticisms of PIPA, and when he's not in DC, he actually travels around MA and holds "office hours". This isn't an endorsement, but its worth contacting his staff and telling them how you feel about CISPA.

Scott Brown is actually not a bad senator. Conservative in some areas but progressive in others. Several of my close friends have had conversations with him and say he is actually open to considering new ideas and is an intelligent man guided by reason.

Can someone tell me why everyone wants to change my internet. Its seriously starting to annoy me. Also why is every company saving all me information....these companies need to fuck off, or we need to create a free internet environment we can all go to.

How the fuck are we ever supposed to win when every time we kill this unjust bullshit they wrap it up and stick it in another bill in a deeper darker corner? Do I have to do this every week for the rest of my life?

Edit: and for what its worth I DID call them again... but I am le tired...

If you end up talking to an unpaid inern on the phone, ask for the l.a. Or l.d. Who works on telecom and technology issues. I worked on the hill, and most offices who believe they are safe from any consequences of any votes just have a series of interns answering the phone like a psychological help line. Get the l.d. Or the l.a. Who briefs the politician. Believe me 90 percent of actual power brokers on the hill don't know anything about technology or the Internet, they just see dollar signs and opportunities to build favors. It's their staff whose job it is to tell them if there are policy reasons to vote for or against something.

protect the intellectual property and trade secrets of suppliers of information and communications technology products and services

The language is fairly broad. It would be a shame if law enforcement was now tasked with the duties of protecting the private industries Intellectual Property from piracy. It would be a waste of tax money.

If CISPA does end up passing (which it, sadly, looks like will happen) will there be an underground internet? Similar to Deep Web or some other way to illegally encrypt the information you share over the internet?

PCOP or "Protecting Children from Online Predators" act passes Congress by a narrow majority and is signed into law. This legislation grants sweeping and unprecedented powers to the federal government. All content on US-based internet servers becomes subject to FCC jurisdiction, and a licensing scheme is put in place requiring any individual or company wishing to operate a "digital information server" (including, but not limited to, web servers, chat servers, file servers, or online gaming servers) to obtain a license issued by the FCC. Furthermore, an online identification database called "CyberID" is established. Administered by the FCC, this system is designed as a "single login" system that will "work everywhere."

A grace period of six months is granted for all US-based servers to become licensed or shut down. Furthermore, any licensed websites that accept input of any sort from end users must authenticate their users against the CyberID system using an authorization token that is matched to that site's license number. After the grace period, the operation of any unlicensed "digital information" server is a class C felony punishable by 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Under PCOP, licensed server operators are required to provide any and all data collected from end users, as well as keep a standardized log of user activity as outlined in USC Title 47, Chapter 13, §23, and provide this information when requested from authorities.

Does anyone know who made this website? I've been working on a project with a "contact your rep/senator" but have been having a doosy of a time gathering the email addresses of each of them. I'm curious if they were able to get them all/how exactly they are emailing the letters.

Lamarr Alexander and Bob Corker are my senators. I called their offices. Apparently, they hold a meet-and-greet called 'Tennessee Tuesdays' in Washington, DC. It is a forum for Tennesseans visiting the capitol to meet with the senators. I will not be able to attend as I have no ability to get to it, but if any person from Tennessee can, this could be your chance to say something.

Other then that, I conveyed my opposition to this bill and any future bill restricting Internet access, curbing privacy, and neutrality. It will hopefully be heard, although I doubt it will be heeded.

I, for one, think we should come up with a plan for what we do when it does get passed. Clearly, the people in charge are too old and asinine to let this drop, so we should probably expect a little 1984 until they all die and we can legalize filesharing, pot, and sanctified buttsex.

I just called my reps and discovered the one of the Senators (Diane Feinstein) is one of the cosponsors of the CISPA bill. I asked her office why she took a stance that is in opposition of our constitutional rights and her office had no comment. She is up for reelection this fall; I say we vote her out of office for cosponsoring such a horrible piece of legislation that is contrary to everything the founding fathers had envisioned for our country and the people who comprise it. I also told her office that due to this act of cosponsoring CISPA that she has lost my vote this fall. Her office promised to pass all of my comments on to the Senator.

If this is really so important to us, why don't we USE the Internet to organize massive protests. The stuff that will go down in history books.

The thing that bothered me about Kony 2012 is that people thought they were getting involved by upvoting a post or sharing a video. I want the internet to be a tool, not a crutch. Lets band together and make a real change to preserve the internet that brought the globe together with Facebook, that teaches millions of people millions of different things every day.

What if man discovered fire, only to be like "Meh, its nice i guess, but i'm going to piss on it and ruin it." That is what they are doing. The US is messing up and trying to get in the way progress, change, and the bettering of all of us as people. WHY WOULD THEY DO THAT.

The internet is an amazing thing and its changing the human race in truly awesome ways. So lets get off our computers, take to the streets, and fight for it!

What say you, reddit??? Lets make a movement, lets bring about change. Lets DO something, tomorrow, that will be remembered for its impact and importance. We should, we can and we will change the future. And we decide what to change it to.

The the Obama Administration said they would veto CISPA (link), which is why the CSA of 2012 is getting traction (see GovTrack for the date this was submitted). The CSA may have more clout because its length means there's more going on and the President's fears may be allayed by some new language, but there are still problems with the bill.

All that said:
1) Stop calling about CISPA. The Senate isn't going to vote for it with the Administration's promise of a veto and their own version of cybersecurity protection being offered by Lieberman (S. 2105) and McCain (S. 2151).
2) Asking a Senator to not vote for CISPA is too easy and gives you little indication of how they will vote for S. 2105 or S. 2151.
3) Instead, try asking about intentions for S. 2105 and S. 2151. If Senators say they support these bills, you can ask whether they've read significant parts of them (S. 2105 is over 200 pages and has 7+ Titles, S. 2151 is over 100 pages and has 3 Titles). Additionally, try asking whether private entities designated "covered critical systems" by the Secretary of Homeland Security have the right to appeal that designation (if they have an answer, you can rest assured that yes or no, your senator at least understands the mechanisms being proposed).

I really think a shift in focus would be good. It will make us seem less reactionary, more educated to the real threats out there, and will hopefully put some officials in a difficult position.